One of my former history professors, Dennis Mitchell, recently released a history book entitled, A New History of Mississippi. “Mississippi,” he says, “is a place and a state of mind. The name evokes strong reactions from those who live here and from those who do not, but who think they know something about its people and their past.” Because of its past, as described by Anthony Walton in his book, Mississippi: An American Journey, Mississippi “can be considered one of the most prominent scars on the map” of these United States. Walton goes on to explain that “there is something different about Mississippi; something almost unspeakably primal and vicious; something savage unleashed there that has yet to come to rest.” To prove his point, he notes that, “[o]f the 40 martyrs whose names are inscribed in the national Civil Rights Memorial in Montgomery, AL, 19 were killed in Mississippi.” “How was it,” Walton asks, “that half who died did so in one state?” — My Mississippi, Your Mississippi and Our Mississippi.

Mississippi has expressed its savagery in a number of ways throughout its history, slavery being the cruelest example, but a close second being Mississippi’s infatuation with lynchings. Lynchings were prevalent, prominent and participatory. A lynching was a public ritual — even carnival-like — within many states in our great nation. While other States engaged in these atrocities, those in the deep south took a leadership role, especially that scar on the map of America — those 82 counties between the Tennessee line and the Gulf of Mexico and bordered by Louisiana, Arkansas and Alabama.

Vivid accounts of brutal and terrifying lynchings in Mississippi are chronicled in various sources: Ralph Ginzburg’s 100 Years of Lynching and Without Sanctuary: Lynching Photography in America, just to name two. But I note that today, the Equal Justice Initiative released Lynching in America: Confronting the Terror of of Racial Terror; apparently, it too is a must-read.

In Without Sanctuary, historian Leon Litwack writes that between 1882 and 1968 an estimated 4,742 Blacks met their deaths at the hands of lynch mobs. The impact this campaign of terror had on black families is impossible to explain so many years later. That number contrasts with the 1,401 prisoners who have been executed legally in the United States since 1976. In modern terms, that number represents more than those killed in Operation Iraqi Freedom and more than twice the number of American casualties in Operation Enduring Freedom — the Afghanistan conflict. Turning to home, this number also represents 1,700 more than who were killed on 9/11. Those who died at the hands of mobs, Litwack notes, some were the victims of “legal” lynchings — having been accused of a crime, subjected to a “speedy” trial and even speedier execution. Some were victims of private white violence and some were merely the victims of “Nigger hunts” — murdered by a variety of means in isolated rural sections and dumped into rivers and creeks. “Back in those days,” according to black Mississippians describing the violence of the 1930’s, “to kill a Negro wasn’t nothing. It was like killing a chicken or killing a snake. The whites would say, ‘Niggers jest supposed to die, ain’t no damn good anyway — so jest go an’ kill ’em.’ . . . They had to have a license to kill anything but a Nigger. We was always in season.” Said one white Mississippian, “A white man ain’t a-going to be able to live in this country if we let niggers start getting biggity.” And, even when lynchings had decreased in and around Oxford, one white resident told a visitor of the reaffirming quality of lynchings: “It’s about time to have another [one],” he explained, “[w]hen the niggers get so that they are[n’t] afraid of being lynched, it is time to put the fear in them.”

How could hate, fear or whatever it was that transformed genteel, God-fearing, God-loving Mississippians into mindless murderers and sadistic torturers? I ask that same question about the events which bring us together on this day. Those crimes of the past as well as these have so damaged the psyche and reputation of this great State.

Mississippi soil has been stained with the blood of folk whose names have become synonymous with the Civil Rights Movement like Emmett Till, Willie McGee, James Cheney, Andrew Goodman, Michael Schwerner, Vernon Dahmer, George W. Lee, Medgar Evers and Mack Charles Parker. But the blood of the lesser-known people like Luther Holbert and his wife, Elmo Curl, Lloyd Clay, John Hartfield, Nelse Patton, Lamar Smith, Clinton Melton, Ben Chester White, Wharlest Jackson and countless others, saturates these 48,434 square miles of Mississippi soil. On June 26, 2011, four days short of his 49th birthday, the blood of James Anderson was added to Mississippi’s soil.

The common denominator of the deaths of these individuals was not their race. It was not that they all were engaged in freedom fighting. It was not that they had been engaged in criminal activity, trumped up or otherwise. No, the common denominator was that the last thing that each of these individuals saw was the inhumanity of racism. The last thing that each felt was the audacity and agony of hate; senseless hate: crippling, maiming them and finally taking away their lives.

Mississippi has a tortured past, and it has struggled mightily to reinvent itself and become a New Mississippi. New generations have attempted to pull Mississippi from the abyss of moral depravity in which it once so proudly floundered in. Despite much progress and the efforts of the new generations, these three defendants are before me today: Deryl Paul Dedmon, Dylan Wade Butler and John Aaron Rice. They and their coconspirators ripped off the scab of the healing scars of Mississippi . . . causing her (our Mississippi) to bleed again.

Hate comes in all shapes, sizes, colors, and from this case, we know it comes in different sexes and ages. A toxic mix of alcohol, foolishness and unadulterated hatred caused these young people to resurrect the nightmarish specter of lynchings and lynch mobs from the Mississippi we long to forget. Like the marauders of ages past, these young folk conspired, planned, and coordinated a plan of attack on certain neighborhoods in the City of Jackson for the sole purpose of harassing, terrorizing, physically assaulting and causing bodily injury to black folk. They punched and kicked them about their bodies — their heads, their faces. They prowled. They came ready to hurt. They used dangerous weapons; they targeted the weak; they recruited and encouraged others to join in the coordinated chaos; and they boasted about their shameful activity. This was a 2011 version of the Nigger hunts.

Though the media and the public attention of these crimes have been focused almost exclusively on the early morning hours of June 26, 2011, the defendants’ terror campaign is not limited to this one incident. There were many scenes and many actors in this sordid tale which played out over days, weeks, and months. There are unknown victims like the John Doe at the golf course who begged for his life and the John Doe at the service station. Like a lynching, for these young folk going out to “Jafrica” was like a carnival outing. It was funny to them – an excursion which culminated in the death of innocent, African-American James Craig Anderson. On June 26, 2011, the fun ended.

But even after Anderson’s murder, the conspiracy continued . . . And, only because of a video, which told a different story from that which had been concocted by these defendants, and the investigation of law enforcement — state and federal law enforcement working together — was the truth uncovered.

What is so disturbing . . . so shocking . . . so numbing . . . is that these Nigger hunts were perpetrated by our children . . . students who live among us . . . educated in our public schools . . . in our private academies . . . students who played football lined up on the same side of scrimmage line with black teammates . . . average students and honor students. Kids who worked during school and in the summers; kids who now had full-time jobs and some of whom were even unemployed. Some were pursuing higher education and the Court believes they each had dreams to pursue. These children were from two-parent homes and some of whom were the children of divorced parents, and yes some even raised by a single parent. No doubt, they all had loving parents and loving families.

In letters received on his behalf, Dylan Butler, whose outing on the night of June 26 was not his first, has been described as “a fine young man,” “a caring person,” “a well mannered man” who is truly remorseful and wants to move on with his life . . . a very respectful . . . a good man . . . a good person . . . a loveable, kind-hearted teddy bear who stands in front of bullies . . . and who is now ashamed of what he did. Butler’s family is a mixed-race family: for the last 15 years, it has consisted of an African-American step-father and step-sister plus his mother and two sisters. The family, according to the step-father, understandably is “saddened and heart broken.”

These were everyday students like John Aaron Rice, who got out of his truck, struck James Anderson in the face and kept him occupied until others arrived . . . Rice was involved in multiple excursions to so-called “Jafrica”, but he, for some time, according to him and his mother, and an African-American friend shared his home address.

And, sadly, Deryl Dedmon, who straddled James Anderson and struck him repeatedly in the face and head with his closed fists. He too was a “normal” young man indistinguishable in so many ways from his peers. Not completely satisfied with the punishment to which he subjected James Anderson, he “deliberately used his vehicle to run over James Anderson – killing him.” Dedmon now acknowledges he was filled with anger.

I asked the question earlier, but what could transform these young adults into the violent creatures their victims saw? It was nothing the victims did . . . they were not championing any cause . . . political . . . social . . . economic . . . nothing they did . . . not a wolf whistle . . . not a supposed crime . . . nothing they did. There is absolutely no doubt that in the view of the Court the victims were targeted because of their race.

The simple fact is that what turned these children into criminal defendants was their joint decision to act on racial hatred. In the eyes of these defendants (and their coconspirators) the victims were doomed at birth . . . their genetic make-up made them targets.

In the name of White Power, these young folk went to “Jafrica” to “fuck with some niggers!” Echos of Mississippi’s past. White Power! Nigger! According to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, that word Nigger is the “universally recognized opprobrium, stigmatizing African-Americans because of their race.” It’s the nuclear bomb of racial epithets – as Farai Chideya has described the term. With their words, with their actions – “I just ran that Nigger over” – there is no doubt that these crimes were motivated by the race of the victims. And from his own pen, Dedmon, sadly and regretfully wrote that he did it out of “hatred and bigotry.”

The Court must respond to one letter it received from one identified as a youth leader in Dylan Butler’s church, a mentor, he says and who describes Dylan as “a good person.” The point that “[t]here are plenty of criminals that deserve to be incarcerated,” is well taken. Your point that Dylan is not one of them — not a criminal . . . is belied by the facts and the law. Dylan was an active participant in this activity, and he deserves to be incarcerated under the law. What these defendants did was ugly . . . it was painful . . . it is sad . . . and it is indeed criminal.

In the Mississippi we have tried to bury, when there was a jury verdict for those who perpetrated crimes and committed lynchings in the name of WHITE POWER . . . that verdict typically said that the victim died at the hands of persons unknown. The legal and criminal justice system operated with ruthless efficiency in upholding what these defendants would call WHITE POWER.

Today, though, the criminal justice system (state and federal) has proceeded methodically, patiently and deliberately seeking justice. Today we learned the identities of the persons unknown . . . they stand here publicly today. The sadness of this day also has an element of irony to it: each defendant was escorted into court by agents of an African-American United States Marshal; having been prosecuted by a team of lawyers which includes an African-American AUSA from an office headed by an African-American U.S. Attorney — all under the direction of an African-American Attorney General, for sentencing before a judge who is African-American, whose final act will be to turn over the care and custody of these individuals to the BOP — an agency headed by an African-American.

Today we take another step away from Mississippi’s tortured past . . . we move farther away from the abyss. Indeed, Mississippi is a place and a state of mind. And those who think they know about her people and her past will also understand that her story has not been completely written. Mississippi has a present and a future. That present and future has promise. As demonstrated by the work of the officers within these state and federal agencies — black and white; male and female, in this Mississippi, they work together to advance the rule of law. Having learned from Mississippi’s inglorious past, these officials know that in advancing the rule of law, the criminal justice system must operate without regard to race, creed or color. This is the strongest way Mississippi can reject those notions — those ideas which brought us here today.

At their guilty plea hearings, Deryl Paul Dedmon, Dylan Wade Butler and John Aaron Rice told the world exactly what their roles were . . . it is ugly . . . it is painful . . . it is sad . . . it is criminal.

The Court now sentences the defendants as follows: [The specific sentences are not part of the judge’s prepared remarks.]

The Court has considered the advisory guidelines computations and the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The Court has considered the defendants’ history and characteristics. The Court has also considered unusual circumstances — the extraordinary circumstances — and the peculiar seriousness and gravity of those offenses. I have paid special attention to the plea agreements and the recommendations of the United States. I have read the letters received on behalf of the defendants. I believe these sentences provide just punishment to each of these defendants and equally important, I believe they serve as adequate deterrence to others and I hope that these sentences will discourage others from heading down a similar life-altering path. I have considered the Sentencing Guidelines and the policy statements and the law. These sentences are the result of much thought and deliberation.

These sentences will not bring back James Craig Anderson nor will they restore the lives they enjoyed prior to 2011. The Court knows that James Anderson’s mother, who is now 89 years old, lived through the horrors of the Old Mississippi, and the Court hopes that she and her family can find peace in knowing that with these sentences, in the New Mississippi, Justice is truly blind. Justice, however, will not be complete unless these defendants use the remainder of their lives to learn from this experience and fully commit to making a positive difference in the New Mississippi. And, finally, the Court wishes that the defendants also can find peace.

“Bro. Asa, I’m also distressed about the recent killing of Kajieme Powell. I understand Police having to protect themselves but this young man was acting erratically and after viewing the video ; it looked like “suicide by cop”. Are the cadets trained on how to disarm someone acting in a bizarre manner who is probably mentally ill without killing him. One officer years ago told me that you can drop someone by shooting them in the legs/knees/arms. He’s never had to kill anyone. They cuffed this young man and it was clear that he was down and unable to attack anyone. I guess I’m wondering given your law enforcement expertise; (when you have the time) if you can address these issues on your blog. I also understand the precariousness of doing so given your profession. I would like to see more Officers with the intelligence, common sense and expertise of Highway Patrol Captain Ron Johnson! I feel like you do. Thanks for hearing me out!”

My reply:

Dear Sis. Carolyn,

Like you I’m also distressed by the “executing” of our Black men and boys by the police.

As a Black man, a Black father of a young Black son and a Black police officer, I have a certain… maybe even an “unique” perspective… into these situations. However, I made a conscious decision to not do a blog post, so as to add to the deluge of intellectualized placebos from all quarters, which only real and lasting accomplishment is to further desensitize our society to the genocide being committed against those of African descent… those with black and brown skins… worldwide. The Word states that “there is nothing new under the sun”. It’s all been said, discussed and debated before, as well as now. The truth is that whether it’s 1614, 1714, 1814, 1914 or 2014, the terrorism that is white supremacy continues to be unleashed upon us, ironically even more so under the administration of the first USA “black” President and his “black” Attorney General.

However, as you are my sister and I know of the sincerity of your empathy, I will offer my “two cents” to you… to spend as you wish.

In the Kajieme Powell incident, what compounds the situation was the fact that he was mentally and emotionally disturbed. I don’t know about Kajieme’s personal history, but I do know that in an effort to reduce health care costs, there is a trend to release those with mental and emotional problems into society, when they actually should be in facilities that are adept in treating their conditions, or at least monitoring and stabilizing it with medication. They are being released into the custody of those who do love them, but aren’t capable in handling their conditions if it deteriorates. It then more often than not, becomes a police problem. However, police officers aren’t trained to be psychologists. Simply put: we’re trained to eliminate a threat with extreme prejudice… which means different things to different police officers. As a police officer in Canada, we’re specifically trained that when you’re dealing with someone who is mentally and emotionally disturbed, who is armed and making threats, including asking to be killed by the police, you’re dealing with one of the most erratic, irrational and dangerous situations you will ever face as a police officer. From what I know, this training is similar in the USA. Regardless of one’s training, the response to these situations is ultimately made by the individual officer(s). This response would be influenced by a number of factors such as the officer’s upbringing, how he/she is socialized and their resulting prejudices; their views on race, class, gender; as well as their own physical, mental and emotional abilities, capabilities and shortcomings, etc.

Looking at the video, it is my belief that other interventions could have been utilized before the decision to shoot and kill Kajieme became the final solution. Disengage, back up, contact family members, his social worker or mental health specialist etc, to speak with him. Get some police shields (from Ferguson) and rush him with an officer prepared to discharge a Taser to incapacitate him. I don’t want to be a “Monday morning arm chair quarterback” because I wasn’t there, but from what I can deduce from this situation, these are some of the options I personally would attempt or discuss with my fellow officers, before deciding that I had no other choice but to shoot and kill him. However, based on the training they (and I) have received, this would be classified as a justifiable, legal response to this situation… i.e., “a good shoot”. It is my opinion that any shooting by a police officer that takes the life of an individual, whatever the circumstances, certainly should be viewed as a tragedy for all parties involved. A “good shoot” is therefore an oxymoron.

As a “black” police officer, I’m so proud of Captain Ron Johnson and how he is handling the crisis in Ferguson. I understand and empathize with the trials, tribulations, as well as the emotions he’s going through. He’s in a tough position as most people… both white and black… want him for their own self interests, to fail in bringing some peace and order to the community… a community he grew up in. It’s bad enough that his (white) superiors and (white) colleagues have been pulling stunts to undermine him every step of the way, but that’s expected. What annoys me most are the pseudo-intellectual, wanna-be black revolutionary social media activists, sitting in the safety of their homes, in their comfortable swivel arm chairs in-front of a computer, discrediting and referring to him as an “uncle tom”, “sellout”, “token” and “stooge of the white man sent to pacify the negroes”.

What these pseudo-intellectual, wanna-be black revolutionary social media activists don’t understand, which I do, is that Captain Johnson is the shepherd keeping the wolves at bay, who are more than ready, willing and able… and are only waiting for the right opportunity to slaughter their prey. Believe me, I know of what I speak. I’ve been in policing situations where my presence and forceful intervention in certain situations, have prevented the shooting and possible death of a Black male, as well as saved some of them from being criminalized for minor indiscretions. What these pseudo-intellectual, wanna-be black revolutionary social media activists fail to realize, which I do, is that the military equipment deployed against the peaceful protesters was not a show of force, but a use of force. It was only by the grace of God that one of the trigger happy cops didn’t start shooting into the protesters, which would have caused a conditionednatural chain reaction by the other cops to start shooting too. It would have resulted into another Sharpeville massacre. Believe me, I know of what I speak. I was on a tactical emergency task force. The reason these same pseudo-intellectual, wanna-be black revolutionary social media activists want Captain Johnson to fail, why they not so secretly welcome the slaughter of innocents, is the simple fact that it will provide the needed fodder for their next Facebook, Twitter and blog rhetoric and posts, which will undoubtedly bring more “hits” and notoriety to their sites.

Let me share an article with you about the shooting and killing of a mentally and emotionally disturbed teenager in Toronto, Canada by a police officer: “The Killing of Sammy Yatim”. It’s very informative on a number of different levels. First it shows the similarities in police training, in Canada and the USA, at handling these types of situations. More importantly, the article humanizes both the victim and the officer. Too often the media, particularly social media, demonizes and dehumanizes those they see as their adversaries. We need to always remember that both are human beings with families who suffer in their own way.

Franz Fanon in the Wretched of the Earth said, “The last battle of the colonized against the colonizer will often be the fight for the colonized against each other.”

Rwanda’s unrepentant refusal to talk with the DRC based, Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda (FDLR) rebels, eat many heads up in the region. Of late, the world evidenced the tug of war between Rwanda and Tanzania after President Jakaya Kikwete proposed round-table talks. Again, despite all misunderstandings, we need to face it that the conflict in the Great Lakes needs to be dealt with. For better or for worse, nothing human is forever. For how long will we live under fear and conflicts?

Currently, the US is in dialogue with the Talibans in Afghanistan. Israel and Palestine have recently resumed peace talks. This means that any conflict, be it protracted or otherwise, can be resolved. Reconciliation is the only way forward wherever there is conflict. Rwanda as well as DRC needs to move forward given that FDLR rebels will never live in DRC forever.

I understand how Kigali feels, especially when it remembers the magnitude of the sin that FDLR committed during the 1994 genocide that wiped out about one million Rwandans, Tutsi and moderate Hutus. I know how traumatizing it is to revisit such history. Importantly though, reconciliation is inevitable shall the region aspire to have peace and prosperity. Africa’s still dependent on its former masters and other rich and developed countries. How come now that such dependent continent is embarking on creating more conflict than reducing them? Again, history is always written by survivors. Methinks Rwanda should search its soul to see to it that the conflict is solved so that life can go on and write a new history of reconciliation.

Rwanda won’t be the first country to embark on reconciliation. Blacks in South Africa suffered more than any country under the Apartheid regime. Nelson Mandela who spearheaded fight against Apartheid was jailed for long. Again, after realizing that conflict can be used constructively to avoid more destruction, Mandela was the first person to forgive Apartheid regime after understanding the way it felt about what it committed. Through talking to each other, both parts in South Africa were able to read each other’s way of looking at things. In the end, South Africa made a precedent to which almost every peace lover refers to. African sage has it that, those who fight are the ones that cooperate. No way can human beings live without differences, conflicts and all sorts of things as far as misunderstandings are concerned. On this ground, it makes sense to call upon Rwanda and FDLR rebels to talk peace, instead of harbouring hatred and vengeance. Such stance won’t solve any problem. Instead, it’ll double if not triple them.

It defies logic, for example, to presume all Hutus as genociders. How if at all those born during or after genocide did not partake in this megalomania? Hutus who did not partake in the crime feel betrayed and victimized. Those judged wholesomely feel that they’ve the duty to cleanse their names. Those born in DRC, just like those who took over after Genocide, who were born in Uganda, think that they’d go back home. This is where it boils down to scheming to deal with current Rwandan regime either peacefully or violently. This is not the situation a country is supposed to live in. Why don’t we want to learn the menacing danger refugees in Uganda caused to Rwanda? Suppose DRC stabilizes and supports FDLR to take on their home government as Uganda did? This means that another calamity is in the making. This is why it becomes inevitable for two sides to talk and reconcile. How if at all, genocide was the work of a select few in power by then? Rwandans need peace. And peace will come from reconciliation.

I know verily that Kigali would like to respect the dead. Again, as Gerard Prunier put it in his book, The Rwanda Crisis; History of Genocide, “Respect of the dead does not preclude the efforts to understand why they died.” Such take helps us to seek truth and peace in order to avoid repeating the same in the name of preserving and honouring the dead.

Prunier goes on saying that Hutus and Tutsi were not created as cats and dogs. Allowing the conflict to shrive amidst Rwandans is but faulting God’s goodwill of endowing us with higher and bigger brains that make us humans and not animals. Sometimes, due to ignorance, fear and confusion, man can commit sacrilegious things that even an animal can’t commit. Again, once this happens, sane minds must intervene. This is why the international community formed Arusha-based ICTR. This aimed at punishing the guilty and redressing the offended. Now, if ICTR and Gacaca did punish the guilty, why then presume all Hutus as killers?

After all, genocide can be said to be the product of European eugenics, especially John Speke by proxy, that created Hutus and Tutsi for their reasons of exploiting them. It is absurd and indifference to keep on, for example, calling the 1994 genocide, genocide against Tutsi. So too, it’ll be nonsensical to keep on alleging that all Hutus committed genocide. To do away from this danger, Rwanda must willingly talk to rebels instead of feeling that the international community is forcing it to talk. The upshot is those situated out of the conflict, see it better than those involved in it.

This documentary covers Germany’s use of genocide, concentration camps and ‘extermination’ policies in Africa – decades before World War Two and their use in Europe.

A hundred years ago, three quarters of the Herero people of the German colony of Namibia were killed, many in concentration camps.

Today, the descendants of the survivors are seeking reparations from the German government. This film tells for the first time this forgotten story and its links to German racial theories.

Described by the BBC as the story of Germany’s forgotten genocide. This powerful documentary by David Adetayo Olusoga took a sensitive and uncompromising look at the tragic circumstances leading to the massacre of three quarters of the Namibia population in German concentration camps built in Africa.

The programme included graphic reconstructions and did not shirk from showing disturbing scenes which revealed the savagery of european colonial ideology put into practise.

Wrangles evidenced recently between Kenyan Judiciary and the executive over the ruling that Sudanese strong man, Omar Bashir, be apprehended shall he visit Kenya, left many analysts flabbergasted. One judge, Ncholas Ombija, made a historical ruling when ordered the Minister for Internal Security to see to it that when Bashir sets foot on Kenyan soil, he be apprehended and handed over to The Hague to face the music. We used to read about such rulings made by European judges, famous ones being those that were made by Spanish Judge Fernando Andreu, and French judge Jean-Louis Bruguière, who in April 2008 and November 2006 respectively, indicted Rwandan President, Paul Kagame. When these two justices indicted Kagame, many people wrongly thought that this was a venue for only European judges. Now that Ombija has open Pandora’s Box for our bigwigs, who will be safe?

More on Kenyan justice, this historical ruling did not augur well with the executive. When cornered the vulture cries wolf. Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs was quotes as saying that the government would not abide by the ruling of its own court. What a dangerous stance? The Minister went on saying that Kenya will abide by the position that was taken by AU opposing the indictment of Bashir. How can a free country endanger its freedom for the sake of an individual who is not its citizen? Legally and logically, the constitution of Kenya is above that of AU. Whatever Kenyans do, Kenya comes first. Even if we look at two international instruments playing in this fracas, why is Kenya upholding AU’s non-binding decision whilst it violates Roma Statutes that Kenya signed voluntarily? Why is it that Kenya wants to abuse its own new constitution before even it marks a year? Why doesn’t Kenya do like Uganda that distanced itself when Bashir was invited to a conference in Kampala. Uganda successfully avoided unnecessary legal and political wrangling.

Again, Kenya is a member of East African Community. Doesn’t it see that by doing what one of its counterparts avoided, it is offending the same counterpart? It is shocking and sad that the Minister does not get it that AU has lost its legitimacy so as to support illegitimate regimes, even when they have committed atrocities against their people as it is the case with Bashir. Many were shocked to hear such law-breaking and self-inculpatory words coming from the Minister. To add insult to injury, thereafter, the Minister for Foreign Affairs was dispatched to Khartoum to mend fences. If anything, though the government in Nairobi is still flexing its muscles, the dent… deep and humongous one… has already been made. Will it be wise for the government that came to power after vanguishing dictatorship to taint its image in the defence of a dictator just the same as the one it toppled? Isn’t this high order hypocrisy?

Will Kibaki uphold the constitution and serve the Kenyans that voted for him or trumple over it and serve Sudanese strong man, and for what reasons and gains? Chances are that the executive is waging a losing battle for its peril thanks to the fact that the justice made his decision based on the provisions of the new constitution. Therefore, whoever advises Kibaki should be wise to underscore the fact that, under the new constitution, nobody is above the law. If the executive is still thinking by using the past-frozen brain when the president was above the law and the executive above judiciary, needs to be told that things have long changed. Although Kibaki spoiled the party at the promulgation of new constitution by inviting Bashir, why should he add more salt to injuries? By then thanks to the euphoria Kenyans were in, he got away with it. Will he get away with it once again? The answer is nope. Logically, it doesn’t add up even make sense for Kibaki to dent his image siding with a stinking dictator indicted for committing genocide against his own peole. What transpired in 2008 seems to have not given a lesson to Kibaki and all those that think that they can take the hoi polloi for a ride.

Moreover, chief justice Dr. Willy Mutunga has already weighed in very heavily and categorically so to speak. Responding to rants that the executive were not thinking about complying with the ruling, Mutunga was quoted as thus: “The Judiciary and its officers shall not be intimidated to bend the law”. To make his message clear, Mutunga added that Kenya must choose between anarchy and the rule of the law. Suppose the executive stick on their guns, will the judiciary allow itself to be cowered or stiff its neck and therefore create a crisis especially at this time Kenya is at war with al-Shabaab? What is the right thing to do under such circumstances?

In essence, Kenya has nothing to lose by dumping Bashir. We all know that Kenya is a major economc and political player in South Sudan. Shall it keep on thinking it can serve two masters namely Bashir and South Sudan? It should not wonder when South Sudan decided to part ways with it. For the French sage has it that “les amis des mes sont mes amis”, namely the friends of my friends are my friends. What of the enemies of my friends? They are obvious my enemies.

In sum, let us face it: will the Kenyan executive seal ignore the truth and go on defending Bashir by violating its own constitution? What precedent does the executive make in the first place? What legacy is Kibaki making? It time to warn Kenya that doing Bashir’s laundry will leave it messy and stinky.